Part 1-B, Da, Ra and 2 of the judgment shall be reversed.

No. 1-b, c, and 3 of the judgment of the defendant.

A. In relation to the crime of subparagraph 1(A) of the judgment, the defendant is not guilty, or misunderstanding of facts, (1) he only caused the victim's scam with the victim twice during a dispute with the victim, (2) there is no scam with the victim, or there is no scam with the victim's face. (3) In relation to the crime of subparagraph 1(b) of the judgment, the defendant only caused the victim's scam with the victim at one time, (2) there is no scam with the victim, (3) there is no scambling with the victim, or scam with the head, and (4) there is no injury with the victim due to the victim's scambling with the victim's scam with the victim's scam with the victim, and (5) there is no scambling with the victim since the victim's scambling with the victim's scam with the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted each of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two months of imprisonment with prison labor and four months of imprisonment with prison labor for the remaining crimes in its holding) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the judgment of the court below as to No. 1-B, C, D, and 2.

A prosecutor applied for the amendment to a bill of amendment of an indictment with the content that he/she changed the date and time of the offense in Article 1-(c) from November 22, 2013 to " November 21, 2013" in the facts charged at the trial, and this court permitted it, thereby changing the subject of the judgment.

The lower court rendered a single sentence by treating the crimes No. 1-B, D, and 2 as concurrent crimes in the judgment of the first instance and the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, which have changed the date and time of the crime as above. Thus, the first-B, C, of the judgment of the lower court.